Ep. 9: Property Rights

The Naked Constitution is back from Christmas Break! This week Adam talks about the constitution’s safeguards for property and economic rights with a man who fights to uphold those rights: Robert McNamara of the Institute for Justice. Although many liberals will insist that the Constitution has little to say about property (“life, liberty, and … whatever”), we beg to differ. We discuss the Founders’ deep respect for property rights, and how those rights should inform an originalist interpretation. In particular, we try to resurrect the sadly-neglected “privileges or immunities” clause, which originally protected the right to earn an honest living and other economic freedoms. Finally, Richard Epstein is with us in spirit, as we discuss the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause, and why theKelodecision ranks right up there with the Supreme Court’s worst rulings.

I do so love it when we get to peer behind the curtain just a little and see how it’s put together … three, two, one …

And stop that baby from crying!

A question for Mr Freedman: what precisely is ‘property’ within the meaning of your Constitution? Real property (ie. land and things affixed thereto) or is it broader, including possessions (cars, cash, computers etc)?

Liberals will say anything, so one day they disparage the lasting authority of the Constitution because the Framers were a bunch of rich white men setting up a system that would protect their property, and the next day the Constitution somehow demeans property rights below “personal rights”.

Also an example of a favorite liberal trope: using different words makes it a different thing.